CD Freaks does it again...

[Slowburn]

They must go out of their way to annoy the crap out of people with that stupid survey overlay. Web design at it's worst!

[t0nee1]

Don't participate in survey....ignore it,don't let it bother you! take it easy! relax! or just don't visit site if it bothers you that much.....

[thecoalman]

From a webmasters point of view I'd have to agree with Slowburn, as I pointed out in the previous thread you can't close it unless you have JS enabled .

[t0nee1]

From a users point of view,I stand by my comment.....

[Rich86]

They must go out of their way to annoy the crap out of people with that stupid survey overlay. Web design at it's worst!

one click on "never" - and it's gone for good? what's the problem?

[MJA]

They must go out of their way to annoy the crap out of people with that stupid survey overlay. Web design at it's worst!

one click on "never" - and it's gone for good? what's the problem?

The ad will not go if you are using firefox with NoScript (FORBID)

[AlanHK]

one click on "never" - and it's gone for good? what's the problem?

First you need to enable cookies, otherwise it pops up on every page. So I do that, then on every new page the overlay opens momentarily, then closes. Better than having to click it shut, but still annoying. Apparently it checks the cookie after opening, instead of before.

It's features like this that make one install ad blocking software.

[thecoalman]

It's features like this that make one install ad blocking software.

You can't block it with ad blocking software. And I think it's safe to say it won't ever be blocked by ad blocking software. Any attempt to try and block ads like this will result in too many false positives. To tell you the truth it may even be copyright infringement to try and do so as it's part of the document, there are no external files used to display it except the css file. Removing the CSS file will only change its positioning and destroy the dstyle of the rest of the page. To completely remove it would require that the source code be changed hence the reason I would suggest that it wopuld be copyright infringement.

[thecoalman]

From a users point of view,I stand by my comment.....

Well my point being that any competent webmaster is not going to display a block of content over the main content that can only be removed via JS. Rule #1 when using JS in a web page is that it isn't required for the main parts of your page to function such as navigation etc. I'd guess many people that have JS disabled are probably thinking to themselves WTF when they click the button and nothing happens. Keep in mind most people disable JS to prevent ads in the first place so not only are they seeing an ad they can't get rid of it . Add to that the others that have cookies disabled and the thing keeps coming back every page load. That's simply poor implementation from a design perspective.

[t0nee1]

Well from a friendly users perspective, if it bothered me that much I'd stop using/visiting site.....JM2cents from a competent non-webmaster...... 8)

[thecoalman]

if it bothered me that much I'd stop using/visiting site.....

Agree 100%, I hate pop-ups myself and never use them unless it's user iniated for real content. 8)

[Rich86]

one click on "never" - and it's gone for good? what's the problem?

First you need to enable cookies, otherwise it pops up on every page. So I do that, then on every new page the overlay opens momentarily, then closes. Better than having to click it shut, but still annoying. Apparently it checks the cookie after opening, instead of before.

It's features like this that make one install ad blocking software.

Well, I do permit CDFreaks to set some cookies (not the ad cookies - just basic cdfreaks).
But this pop-up has not reappeared after clicking "never" just once - the first time. Firefox 2.0.0.4 browser.

[lordsmurf]

Firefox 2.0.0.4 and it fails to go away. JS is enabled.

That site is so full of shit (ActiveX, Flash, ads, scripts, etc) that IE6/IE7 tends to lock up, and Firefox blocks at least a dozen items. Sadly, it still cannot block that pop-up box.

It's obnoxious, yes, but there's really nothing of interest to me on that site anyway. A lot of these "news" sites these days are more hype and repeated propaganda than anything else. At best, it's a product announcement. It's hardly what you'd call news.

Only thing worth visiting is the forum, but some of the information there has to be taken with a grain of salt, especially the blank DVD information that overly relies on shaky homebrew testing methods.

[t0nee1]

lordsmurf wrote"That site is so full of shit ."
Everyone has an opinion , no matter how shitty it may be.....JM shitty opinion.....

[Slowburn]

That site is off my bookmarks list. Checked their forums and there is the same complaint about their crappy website going back to 1999 or so. They're toast.

[thecoalman]

Firefox 2.0.0.4 and it fails to go away. JS is enabled.

Disappears for me when using FF. I'm refferring to the never/later buttons .

[MJA]

lets hope videohelp.com doesn't turn to videofreak.com

[t0nee1]

Slowburn wrote"That site is off my bookmarks list. Checked their forums and there is the same complaint about their crappy website going back to 1999 or so. They're toast.
, yada,yada,yada!........take it off already, that simple!.....

[budz]

That site is so full of shit (ActiveX, Flash, ads, scripts, etc) that IE6/IE7 tends to lock up, and Firefox blocks at least a dozen items. Sadly, it still cannot block that pop-up box.

It's obnoxious, yes, but there's really nothing of interest to me on that site anyway. A lot of these "news" sites these days are more hype and repeated propaganda than anything else. At best, it's a product announcement. It's hardly what you'd call news.

Only thing worth visiting is the forum, but some of the information there has to be taken with a grain of salt, especially the blank DVD information that overly relies on shaky homebrew testing methods.

Nothing of interest to you because they (the members of cdfreaks.com) slammed you in their forums in the media and dvd burner forums in the last few years.

Information that is given by you is also taken with a grain of salt. Don't bash a website just because they don't conform to your standards or knowledge. Remember how you love to bash BENQ drives. I even offered to help you with a BENQ drive. But you cleverly declined.

To Slowburn: Geez, you need to stop whining about the web design at Cdfreaks.com. You don't like it then just don't visit their site. Easy to solve, eh! :P I'm a loyal cdfreaks member that has no beef about their forums. Perhaps if you joined their forums or website you wouldn't have any popups at all.

[AlanHK]

To completely remove it would require that the source code be changed hence the reason I would suggest that it wopuld be copyright infringement.

Complete rubbish. I can do whatever I like with it as long as I don't republish it.

[thecoalman]

Complete rubbish. I can do whatever I like with it as long as I don't republish it.

Sure I agree, but after the page has been delivered to your machine intact. If you don't want to see the ads don't download the page.

[nicky57]

Firefox 2.0.0.4 and it fails to go away. JS is enabled.

That site is so full of shit (ActiveX, Flash, ads, scripts, etc) that IE6/IE7 tends to lock up, and Firefox blocks at least a dozen items. Sadly, it still cannot block that pop-up box.

It's obnoxious, yes, but there's really nothing of interest to me on that site anyway. A lot of these "news" sites these days are more hype and repeated propaganda than anything else. At best, it's a product announcement. It's hardly what you'd call news.

Only thing worth visiting is the forum, but some of the information there has to be taken with a grain of salt, especially the blank DVD information that overly relies on shaky homebrew testing methods.

obnoxious = lordsmurf
Your site is the one to be taken with a grain of salt. Totally biased. Anyone who frequents this forum and cdfreaks knows the only one FOS is you.
Go home and get your shine box!!!!!!!

[AlanHK]

Complete rubbish. I can do whatever I like with it as long as I don't republish it.

Sure I agree, but after the page has been delivered to your machine intact. If you don't want to see the ads don't download the page.

I mean LEGALLY. Copyright has no relevance to what I do with it on my computer.
"Delivered intact"? What right do they or anyone have to require that? Let me answer that: None at all. Please cite the law that says they do.

Are you telling me that I'm legally required to look at every ad somene links to a web page?
(To reduce any ambiguity here, if so you're wrong.)

If that's so, a lot of web filtering apps are in serious trouble. Not to mention anyone who fast forwards through an ad, or god forbid, deletes them automatically.

I can scrape whatever parts of a webpage I like and do with it what I like. Only if I were to republish it would copyright come into play

[thecoalman]

Only if I were to republish it would copyright come into play

Ahhh but if you're a software company offering ad blocking software you are republishing my content for profit, are you not? Lets put this into a different context, if some company offered a service whereby they took a newspaper and cut out all the ads then redistributed it they would be in violation of copyright. Why should a web page be any different? Just to take it step further lets say they not only removed the ads but also removed some of the content , snipped a few paragraphs, maybe took some images out then presented it as what the author has created. This is what ad blocking software does.

Note that there's no litigation that I'm aware of where this has been tested as far as the web goes.

Are you telling me that I'm legally required to look at every ad someone links to a web page?

As far as I'm concerned you can look or not that's up to you however when my content is being defaced by something I tend to get a little pissed. Let me make a few other points. Ad software not only blocks ads but also blocks legitimate content. The filters used are set to block content on set of predefined variables, we'll take images for example. Norton ad blocker will block any image that falls within the common dimensions used for ads, this includes non ad images. It will also block them based on filenames and the directory they are in. Furthermore these filters can easily be circumvented by simply testing against them, they can't block everything.

--------------------

Lastly sites like this one could not exist without advertising, not sure exactly what Baldrick pays but the server costs alone run hundreds of dollars a month. There's also his time and effort which he should be compensated for, a site like this is a lot of work. Without advertising it could only exist through paid subscriptions and we all know that would work as well as a lead balloon. As much as anyone may want to complain about ads they are the reason sites like this are possible, you might want to consider that.

[Rich86]

I pay as much attention to folks who bash cdfreaks.com here - as I do to folks who bash videohelp.com there - none - there is no point to bashing another forum. This isn't a competition. If you think it is - try to win by demonstrating your own excellence and skip trying to make others look bad, because it only makes you look bad.

[buttzilla]

They must go out of their way to annoy the crap out of people with that stupid survey overlay. Web design at it's worst!

one click on "never" - and it's gone for good? what's the problem?

Until you clear your cookies that is. What you don't clear yours?

[Noahtuck]

Ahhh but if you're a software company offering ad blocking software you are republishing my content for profit, are you not?

Have you ever seen that GEICO ad.... where the caveman is asked if he has any comment... and he say's... yeah... ummm. WHAT?!?!?!?!?!

How do you figure if an ad/banner/popup software is "blocking" any one of those, it is "republishing" it ??
It's blocking them, making it so i DO NOT see them... not changing them or rewriting them and then republishing them on the web for me to see in their entirety or seeing them in an altered state... i'm not seeing them at all....

Lets put this into a different context, if some company offered a service whereby they took a newspaper and cut out all the ads then redistributed it they would be in violation of copyright. Why should a web page be any different?

Umm... yeah... a TOTALLY diff. context/situation... because no one is selling the webpage for profit by blocking the ad's, as would be if you were to sell a physical, tangible article such as a newspaper...
And i don't think by removing the ad's they would be in violation of copyright... i think it would be the fact that they reproduced the content of the newspaper/articles that someone else wrote for profit and was original to that newspaper/writer.

Are you telling me that I'm legally required to look at every ad somene links to a web page?

As far as I'm concerned you can look or not that's up to you however when my content is being defaced by something I tend to get a little pissed.

It's not being defaced... i'm not seeing it!!!!!!! it's gone!!!!!!! big diff. from being defaced...

Let me make a few other points. Ad softweare not only blocks ads but also blocks legitimate content.

Again... WHAT?!?!?!
I've never found any of my ad blocking software to be blocking any "legitimate content" of any site i have visited.... just banner and popup crap!!!!!!

Okay.. enough of me blah blah blahing
I've made my weekly rant & i'm starting to think you may have had more straight shots than i have tonight :P

[Noahtuck]

I pay as much attention to folks who bash cdfreaks.com here - as I do to folks who bash videohelp.com there - none -

great... ya had to make remember what i was thinking earlier.....

To Slowburn: Geez, you need to stop whining about the web design at Cdfreaks.com. You don't like it then just don't visit their site. Easy to solve, eh! :P

EXACTLY!!!!!!! 2 post's about the same damn thing.. if ya don't like it... don't go there!!!!

lordsmurf wrote"That site is so full of shit ."
Everyone has an opinion , no matter how shitty it may be.....JM shitty opinion.....

Slowburn wrote"That site is off my bookmarks list. Checked their forums and there is the same complaint about their crappy website going back to 1999 or so. They're toast.
, yada,yada,yada!........take it off already, that simple!.....

And if you like it so much.... fine... go hang out there and stop posting in this thread & bashing people here who DO NOT like it and STFU!!!!!

[AlanHK]

Only if I were to republish it would copyright come into play

Ahhh but if you're a software company offering ad blocking software you are republishing my content for profit, are you not?

No. The content never leaves my computer. No one, least of all the software company, is publishing it.

If I edit a photo on my PC with Photoshop, Adobe isn't publishing it.

Are you telling me that I'm legally required to look at every ad someone links to a web page?

As far as I'm concerned you can look or not that's up to you however when my content is being defaced

No, it's not being defaced, the original content is unchanged.

[thecoalman]

not changing them or rewriting them and then republishing them on the web for me to see in their entirety or seeing them in an altered state... i'm not seeing them at all....

There's distinct difference between blocking external ads such as the ads from Google or blocking a pop-up. For that the ad blocker just blocks the script from ever loading, its not altering anything. The "pop up" in question on cdfreaks is not external content and is technically not a pop up, it can't be blocked as its part of the source code for the page. To remove it you have to alter the source code of the page.

because no one is selling the webpage for profit by blocking the ad's, as would be if you were to sell a physical, tangible article such as a newspaper...
And i don't think by removing the ad's they would be in violation of copyright... i think it would be the fact that they reproduced the content of the newspaper/articles that someone else wrote for profit and was original to that newspaper/writer.

It's almost exactly the same, the ad blocking software is altering pages for their profit. Perhaps you misunderstood me, but you couldn't take newspaper then cut out all the ads with a pair of scissors then resell it for profit. You can't see the correlation there?

It's not being defaced... i'm not seeing it!!!!!!! it's gone!!!!!!! big diff. from being defaced...

Let me give you real world example, when I built my first website few years back I place images in a folder called banners. These were images that were used as titles for the pages with proper alt tags for the non image version. Not only were the images being blocked but so was the code, no image no alternate text, no title on the page.

I've never found any of my ad blocking software to be blocking any "legitimate content" of any site i have visited.... just banner and popup crap!!!!!!

How would you know that if its been removed? This is very problem because you have no idea.